From medical staff to nursing

Specialties NP

Published

I work at a hospital in a decent size city. The powers that be have discovered the ineptitude of many new graduate nurse practitioners. We can of course argue whether it is the university's responsibility to turn out a competent product or not but regardless that ship has sailed. The fact is actually as with undergraduate education the schools seem to have minimal interest in ensuring their students are ready to function upon graduation. No surprise and this will not change. I'm heading toward acceptance, grudgingly, lol. They want to hire us because we are so plentiful and often so inexpensive which of course is a rant for another day.

Gone are the days of hiding behind my NP friendly physician colleagues as I nonchalantly meander into the physician's lounge and attempt to avoid other physicians realizing I'm a NP. I have seen casual conversation fall flat the minute an unfamiliar physician finds out I'm a NP. It was an excellent set up where for the most part I could forget I was a NP and function as a peer with psychiatrists. However as they say all good things come to an end. We are a dime a dozen now, even in psych and I am being changed from medical staff to nursing staff. My privileges are being restricted as the hospital recognized the new NP hospitalists are incapable in many cases of managing patients independently. I will have a doc who co-signs my charts. I am mortified but thankful they aren't touching my salary for now.

We will have a senior DNP who manages the NPs. We will report to our department chairs but will have a NP administrator to run interference. He will set up standardized and then specialized new grad orientation programs with clinical and didactic training as well as an assigned peer mentor. Another necessary evil that will solidify the terrible salaries new grads are accepting.

I am thankful for our patients and also hopeful our reputations can be repaired however disgusted and sad that this has taken us back decades. Our responsibilities are now more limited than the PA hospitalists who have gained physician's trust based on their similar education and competence. So ladies, and by ladies I mean all NPs, get it together so we can start to regain the ground recently lost.

How much do you want to bet that charts are now being "signed" but not perused?

Specializes in NICU.
seems as the midwifes had a healthier group of patients with less fetal death prior to 24 weeks and less preterm birth since both of those factors are more related to genetics and how the mother cares for the baby than intervention by a provider. Not discrediting the entire study but even if its random if the odds/rr/etc have higher levels of neonatal death prior to 24 weeks and stuff thats a sign of a sicker population, no failure by the provider

That is some fair criticism. How about this study? It specifically looked at women who were considered low risk who went to an OB or a midwife. Midwife patients still had less obstetric complications:

(PDF) Outcomes of Planned Hospital Birth Attended by Midwives vs Physicians in British Columbia

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.
I suppose this is a good point. One reason why you should always, always, always know how much revenue you generate. As an NP you need to be aware of every dollar you make. And, if it comes down to it, as much as it sucks, you can always voice your opinion by seeking employment elsewhere.

Unfortunately even if I'm a high end revenue generator, which I am, if they are paying Newgrad Nancy NP 50% of what I'm making I'm not sure that will matter.

Yes showing my displeasure with my feet is aways an option although I'm wondering how far I might have to walk to find a high paying gig in today's climate. :D

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.
to jules- how did they restrict their practice? did they knock them down to H and P and discharge summary mules? or can they still see patients and provide management? or somewhere in between (as in low acuity post ortho surg courtesy consults)?

All my patients also have be seen by and have a physician assigned to them which adds liability to my psychiatrist colleagues and reduces my value. They have to sign off on my discharge prior to the patient being discharged which is always a hassle. It used to be just a co-signing the need for admission for CMS.

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.
Many nurse practitioners are expected to perform the same tasks as physicians. Regardless of how well trained we are. There are many states that let us work without a collaborator and own our own clinics. Either a lot of faith in our progression was misplaced or maybe it's evidence of the impact of newer low grade schooling choices. .

Thanks djmatte for your comments. It is a reduction in my privileges and value. We do perform the same duties as physicians in psychiatry. This is a new issue at my facility, unsure if it is due to the large numbers, ill prepared NPs and likely a combination of both that are bringing to light the deficits. Overall I find it embarrassing as for years we just did our thing beside physicians amicably.

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.
I agree that pound for pound physicians have more experience and education, that's just objective data. But that doesn't automatically equivocate what makes a good clinician. Because a good clinician is not based solely on experience and education- it's also judgment and using the best evidence available at hand, something that not all providers do.

Nurse midwives vs OBs are a good example of this. Here's a link to a cochrane review that looked at studies of women who were randomly assigned OBs or nurse midwives. Those with CNMs had less episiotomies, less epidurals, and less instrumental birth. While there were no differences in neonatal/fetal death or c-section rates, the other factors make for less complications and certainly much less expensive healthcare.

Why is this? OBs have a 4 year residency in pregnancy after medical school. Shouldn't they have better outcomes no matter what? Theoretically, maybe. But it's not bore out in practice.

Midwife‐led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women - Sandall, J - 2�13 | Cochrane Library

Thank you for posting this information. Cochrane certainly carries some weight. To assist me with understanding did this study level the playing field with regard to acuity? Are CNMs able to do episostimies or c-sections? I'm wondering if the less acute deliveries are the ones handled by CNMs at your hospital as happens at mine. I am in awe of the job CNMs and you do with premies.

Specializes in Family Nurse Practitioner.
Jules,

I'm not clear what the signing of the charts mean in your setting. There is no federal regulatory requirement that states NP's H&P's, consults, and progress notes must be signed by a physician. Presumably, this could be state mandate.

The important point to be made about signatures on someone's notes is that these are tied to reimbursement. I'm not sure how in-pt psych billing is different from our setting but the agreement to have both NP and MD sign on a chart (and add their own important pertinent details) is usually tied to the ability to share the billing instead of an attempt to counter-check what the NP wrote.

This is a facility generated policy change and related to safety and quality of care not reimbursement.

seems as the midwifes had a healthier group of patients with less fetal death prior to 24 weeks and less preterm birth since both of those factors are more related to genetics and how the mother cares for the baby than intervention by a provider. Not discrediting the entire study but even if its random if the odds/rr/etc have higher levels of neonatal death prior to 24 weeks and stuff thats a sign of a sicker population, no failure by the provider

Yup. My first thought was the likelihood an ob had a much more complex case.

I really am sorry that this is happening to you. I have seen the interaction of physicians and their NPs work well. What really bothers me is the numbers of students who are going into NP programs without the benefit of practicing for a few years as an RN.

I won't argue that for low risk births one probably does not need a full on OBGYN present at every birth and that outcomes would be similar. I can't answer why more procedures were performed, maybe the NMW does not do all of these procedures??? I did read in the find print in the second study it was not randomized so moms with more problems could have chosen the physician over the NMW.

But we have been giving birth for thousands of years with MOST of the time stuff being OK so again I cannot argue a doc is required at bedside and during pregnancy for everything since most will be uneventful intervention or not.

I mean they let third year med students birth babies sooo yeah lol

Specializes in NICU.

My point is that education and clinical experience is not absolute king over all. I know of plenty of doctors who follow "their own evidence" rather than national guidelines that other NPs/PAs/MDs follow and the latter have better outcomes for it. I actually saw a study once that looked at female vs male doctors and found that female docs had better outcomes (can't remember the specialty) because overall they tended to follow national guidelines vs cowboy medicine of some of their male colleagues.

Specializes in OB.

I'm a CNM chiming in here, this is a great discussion. To clarify about some of the data referenced: generally, CNMs care for low to moderate-risk women. OBs care for low, moderate, and high risk women. Midwives can absolutely perform episiotomies if necessary, they also can first-assist in c-sections, do ultrasounds, colposcopies, circumcision, even abortions in some states (all of these require specific extra training, but are within our scope). They cannot (obviously) perform c-sections or any other actual surgeries, while OB/GYNs can. What the data overwhelmingly shows is that certified nurse midwives, when caring for the same population of women as OBs (not adding in high risk women) DO have better outcomes. It can't be explained away (although that's what many OBs try to do) by "Oh, OBs care for higher risk women so the data is skewed." The research accounts for this and the evidence is still clear. But we will always need collaborating relationships with OBs, because risks will always crop up in pregnancy or labor that require a higher level of care, and sometimes surgical expertise.

It's really frustrating that despite the plentiful evidential support for our ability to care for the majority of women, we are the ones who have to fight for acceptance, recognition, and a seat at the table. OBs are still the norm, midwives are just in the last 5-10 years making serious headway in increasing their percentage of births attended in the U.S. Additionally frustrating is that insurers are still slow to get on board to cover midwifery care at equal rates, or even at all, when we could be SAVING them tons of money. But I digress!

Midwifery is also different from the NP world, though, in an important way---all of our educational programs are overseen and accredited by the same organizations---AMCB and ACME---because we're a much smaller group. There are many online midwifery programs out there, but literally no midwifery programs in the U.S. I know about have sub-par standards, because the overseeing bodies are truly rigorous. Sure, some are ranked higher than others, but there just aren't really any midwifery "diploma mills." The standardization of this is really important and keeps our reputations intact (to those really willing to look at the data and appreciate the benefits of midwifery care).

In terms of leadership at the institutional level and its effect on the profession, I've worked in two facilities, one smallish academic medical center and one huge academic medical center. At the small one, our midwifery director was our main leadership in charge of our schedules, annual reviews, etc. She answered to the OB medical director, who really only signed off on our initial credentialing and possibly our yearly evals. We were unionized even as a small group of 20 midwives with a set salary scale based on years of experience and which was renegotiated every few years to keep up with COL.

At my current facility, there are probably 30 of us (split between hospital-only practice and birth center and hospital practice) and we are NOT unionized, and our director is an advanced practice nurse, but not a midwife. She also answers to the OB medical director and is a great advocate for us, but I dislike how unstructured the process is for pay raises and the generally opaque nature of the discussions around salary. She makes sure to keep everything "fair" (in terms of increasing the salary for experienced midwives and making sure they're not dipping below new grads' salaries) but I prefer a set pay scale based on experience that is renegotiated every few years by a union, as I experience before.

Jules, a huge factor in this difficulty for you is that your specialty is a bit unique. You're 1.) in demand, so used to commanding some of the highest salaries of all APNs and 2.) you don't really NEED psychiatrists to do your job. You're essentially interchangeable with them. That just isn't the case for CNMs, or many other APNs. I can see how some of the changes and frustrations you're facing must seem dire, but to me seem pretty par for the course. I agree that the main issue is inferior NP diploma mills churning out grads and grossly harming the profession. I have no idea what the solution to that problem is, honestly, but I wish you well in your endeavor to maintain a professional and skilled reputation for NPs at your institution.

+ Add a Comment